Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/09/17 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached document submitted by the applicant. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 070302 Discharge Received: Date: 070403 Chapter: 9 AR: 635-200 Reason: Drug Rehabilitation Failure RE: SPD: JPC Unit/Location: A Co, 1-75 Ranger Regt, Hunter Army Airfield, GA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 061214, wrongful use of marijuana between (060920-061019); reduction to E-2, with reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $713 x 1 (suspended), 45 days extra duty and 45 days restriction (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 18 Current ENL Date: 040506 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 16 Weeks/with an approved moral waiver (040408) Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 28Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 28Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B10 Infantryman GT: 100 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (050104-050410) and (051004-060106) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, RNGR TAB V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Lincoln, NE Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record indicates that on 3 November 2006, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/ASAP declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure. On 2 March 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of drug rehabilitation failure/ASAP failure, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 14 March 2007, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 9 contains the authority and outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) for alcohol/drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. Army policy states that an honorable or general discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service. However, an honorable discharge is required if restricted use information is used in the discharge process. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst determined that the characterization of service is improper. The analyst noted that the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a command directed competence for duty (i.e., fitness for duty) biochemical test. This is limited use information as defined in Chapter 6, AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. However, the analyst found that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 2 July 2009 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board noted that the Government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a command directed competence for duty (i.e., fitness for duty) biochemical test. This is limited use information as defined in Chapter 6, AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable discharge. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, the board found that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and voted not to change it. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 5 No change 0 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080014678 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages